 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Boris Godunov
|
 |
Portland, OR
Aug 2001
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Non-Fans do not have a clear concept as to whether there was even one film named Star Wars! They know the series name, but they don't know the name of the individual movies! You said, most people (which includes non-fans in your parenthetical) think of the first movie of Star Wars, period. Non-fans have no clue!
|
Oh my god! Did you just say this?!!! You DID.
In fact, I'll have to repeat in bold so nobody misses it!
IMRAN SEZ: Non-Fans do not have a clear concept as to whether there was even one film named Star Wars!
That is hurting my sides!
This is the single most preposterous statement you've made so far in this thread. So non-fans know the title "Star Wars," but don't know there was an actual movie called "Star Wars?"
Let's see... in 1977, the film was released as "Star Wars." It has been released in theaters ever since as "Star Wars." It's listed in movie guides, tv guides, on posters, etc. as "Star Wars." And even before the prequels, it was one of the most iconic films in American culture. Yet unless you're a fan, you don't know it was called "Star Wars," despite it being the actual title of the movie for 20 years?
Now, to drive my ridicule home, I have to point out that I just quoted in the previous post how you said that the average person on the street who hadn't been living in a cave would KNOW that the first movie was called "Episode I" and "ANH." Now you're saying those same people wouldn't know there was a movie called "Star Wars."
And I'm sure you have something to back up this ludicrous assertion, yes?
quote:
I refered to Episode number, ANH, and "the first movie" within 40 minutes at the beginning of the argument! That was back 3 days ago, well before the argument got going into these Berzerker-like posts. |
So? It doesn't matter the time frame that you shifted your arguments, it matters that you obviously shifted them. When you made your statements about "under a rock" and "man on the street," you were clearly referring to non-fans. Now you claim you just mean fans. That's an unresolvable contradiction, unless you're claiming that the passage of time renders you not responsible for stupid claims you made 3 days previously.
quote:
It seems funny that you were arguing for 3-4 days and just now said I changed my argument, when that was something I brought up in the 1st hour of this long debate. |
 Bullshit, I called you on the change THEN. My post 20-05-2005 18:22:
quote:
In cases for which clarification is needed, saying "The first movie" or "The original Star Wars" is a far cry from saying "Ep4 or "A New Hope." |
That was me pointing out that your shifting to "the first movie" wasn't remotely the same as what you were saying before.
quote:
Then WHY do you need to say "the first movie"? If everyone knows the movie as "Star Wars" and there is no confusion... why is clarification needed? |
Clarification between the trilogy and the movie. That's it. If I said, "I watched Star Wars this weekend, most people would assume I meant the 1977 movie. For those that didn't (and they wouldn't be unreasonable in not assuming, given the current climate, IF they were fans of some degree), and asked, "which one," I'd say "the first one." Or "the original one." That's a far cry from me saying "I watched 'A New Hope' this weekend!" or "I watched Episode IV this weekend!" and having EVERYONE (as you asserted) know what I mean.
quote:
Um... no. People call the Godfather by number to distinguish the movies. They don't say "Godfather" to refer to the first one. They call it "Godfather I". |
Okay, hats off to you. You outdid the stupidity of of your claim that people don't know there's a movie named 'Star Wars.' See other thread.
quote:
Just because the series is named something doesn't mean that people think the first movie is named the same thing. People don't think the first Indiana Jones movie is called "Indiana Jones". |
Because it's title wasn't Indiana Jones, it was "Raiders of the Lost Ark." That's how it was released, and that's how it has ALWAYS been known. And it is also the most popular of the series.
But the first movie of the Star Wars Trilogy WAS titled "Star Wars" for 20 years, marketed and branded as such, and even people who had never SEEN it knew that's what its name was.
quote:
Is Kaak different from most people? Why, because he is a 'fan', however casual? |
Which is precisely the point. He is a fan, however casual. Ergo, he is not like most of the population.
And, as I said before, his thread HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE NOMENCLATURE OF THE MOVIES. Explain to me how his thread could have been about the same thing and proven the opposite of what you're saying and you'll perhaps realize why you're making a categorically flawed argument here.
quote:
I could link you to the crawls, if you want. As che said, after Episode 5, people knew that the first movie was Episode 4. When discussing the movies, calling it episode 4 to distinguish is common sense. |
The crawls in no way prove what most people think is the title of the movie, since A) the movies weren't titled the same as the crawls in any advertisements or branding or merchandising and B) the crawl listing is something that appears for 5 seconds and is never seen again.
No, Imran, what I'm looking for is something that supports your assertion that "everyone" thinks of it as Ep. 4 or ANH as opposed to just "Star Wars."
BTW, che wasn't agreeing with your assertions about everyone, he was speaking for himself and his circle. That says nothing as to what most people knew/thought.
But I do have to point out the delicious irony here of Imran's schizoid arguing:
quote:
I don't understand why Kaak's thread is to be cast aside |
Followed by:
quote:
Because some people on the web make that claim? Hardly 'proof' at all. |
You're such a raging hypocrite. Your favorite tactic in debates is to latch on to anyone else in the thread who agrees with you as if it validates the argument.
My reliance on other posters has only been to show that a majority here (and I suspect there is a disproportionate number of SW fans here) have disagreed with your assertions, particular the ones who were around when Star Wars was released in 1977. You, however, have been claiming that anyone who agrees with you (or otherwise, since there's no real proof that either che or Kaak would agree with your 'arguments') is somehow an authority.
quote:
And how have you proven that 'most people' know the movie as Star Wars, period? Because websites list the official title? |
How many times do I have to list the evidence for you?
1. The movie was originally released as just "Star Wars"
2. Despite the addition in the crawl, for 20 years it was still officially titled just "Star Wars" and rereleased as such.
3. For 20+ years, oodles of merchandise, advertisements, branding materials, etc. that bombarded the public for that time only called it "Star Wars"
4. The use of episode numbers in the vernacular didn't start until TPM was released, because it was the first SW movie ever to be explicitley branded by the number.
5. That this pretty much coincides with Lucas's renaming of the original film shows that he was making the push for a public change in how the films were called.
6. In this thread, a sizeable majority have agreed that most people know the original film simply as "Star Wars."
7. A citation of a lengthy, in-depth examination of Star Wars explicitley stating that most people refer to the original films simply as "Star Wars."
All you have offered are "no it isn't" arguments sans support and claiming that a couple of individuals agreeing with you is a worldwide trend.
quote:
Says the man who stated people know it as Star Wars, period, then there is no confusion at all with Star Wars the entire series, and THEN says he didn't argue that people didn't use the "first movie" to refer to the original film. |
The latter is not the contradiction of the former in any reasonable sense, as I pointed out above. Your definition of "confusion" is incredibly broad if you think so. But then again, you have a habit of trying to redefine terms to suit your tastes, so I'm not surprised. 2+2=5 and all that.
quote:
Sometimes I do and sometimes I don't. Wikipedia is written by whomever. It could be MrFun writing the Star Wars entry, we have no clue. It isn't anyone who has been given a position of authority on this. |
Yet you've provided nothing to contradict or challenge the authority of said article, you're just gainsaying it because it says something you don't like. Brilliant scholarship, sir.
Tell me again: What evidence do you have that everyone knows the 1977 film is called Episode 4 or ANH? Or, shall we go to your latest argument, your assertion that most people don't know there was ever a movie called "Star Wars" and don't know the titles/numbers of any of the films, despite knowing there is a "Star Wars" trilogy? Any proof for that? Of course, how you could possibly even reconcile these two ludicrous positions is beyond me.
Last edited by Boris Godunov on 24-05-2005 at 09:09
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
 |
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
So non-fans know the title "Star Wars," but don't know there was an actual movie called "Star Wars?" |
Yes... a series name doesn't mean there was a movie with that name.
Indiana Jones series, Rambo trilogy, and A Man With No Name Trilogy all bear that out.
Non fans know the series as Star Wars, but don't know the names of the individual movies or what they covered. This is shown when CNN says "Star Wars Breaks Record". It just confirms that to the non-fan that Star Wars is just the series name.
Look at this CNN.com article:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Mov...reut/index.html
"'Star Wars' reigns over box office"
Star Wars has been taken as the name of the series. Unless you think that non-fans think the original 1977 movie is 'reign[ing] over box office'?
quote:
When you made your statements about "under a rock" and "man on the street," you were clearly referring to non-fans. |
Your stated on 5/20 at 2:22 AM:
"Oh come on. If one starts saying "Yoda," it's pretty much a given you're talking any movie but ANH."
You are telling me that you were refering to non-fans as well? Which non-fan knows that Yoda wasn't in the first movie?
Lets be straight here, we were both talking about the fans. Only they would know that Yoda came around in ESB.
quote:
I called you on the change THEN. My post 20-05-2005 18:22:
That was me pointing out that your shifting to "the first movie" wasn't remotely the same as what you were saying before. |
Shall we see what you said the post before on 5/20 at 3:25 PM:
quote:
quote:
So then why do a lot of people refer to as Episode 4 or 'The first movie' now? |
That's just it, they [i]don't], by and large. |
Want to talk about shifting arguments now?
quote:
Clarification between the trilogy and the movie. |
Which you wondered why there would be any confusion, reference your 5/20 2:15 post.
quote:
what I'm looking for is something that supports your assertion that "everyone" thinks of it as Ep. 4 or ANH as opposed to just "Star Wars." |
I said that most people know the original movie is Episode 4 and/or A New Hope and refer to it as such in discussions about Star Wars over "Star Wars" when talking about the 'first movie'.
Kaak's thread is important not only because no one points out that it should just be Star Wars, but in the rankings people have put there are a lot of Episode 4 or A New Hope in the position for the first movie.
quote:
You're such a raging hypocrite. Your favorite tactic in debates is to latch on to anyone else in the thread who agrees with you as if it validates the argument. |
Um... it provides support for the argument, but have I claimed they are conclusive proof? But you take your posters or links which agree with you and say, hey I have proof! See, no one knew the movies as Episode 4 or A New Hope before the prequals (and even after then, you say people don't know them as such!)
quote:
1. The movie was originally released as just "Star Wars"
2. Despite the addition in the crawl, for 20 years it was still officially titled just "Star Wars" and rereleased as such.
3. For 20+ years, oodles of merchandise, advertisements, branding materials, etc. that bombarded the public for that time only called it "Star Wars"
4. The use of episode numbers in the vernacular didn't start until TPM was released, because it was the first SW movie ever to be explicitley branded by the number.
5. That this pretty much coincides with Lucas's renaming of the original film shows that he was making the push for a public change in how the films were called.
6. In this thread, a sizeable majority have agreed that most people know the original film simply as "Star Wars."
7. A citation of a lengthy, in-depth examination of Star Wars explicitley stating that most people refer to the original films simply as "Star Wars."
All you have offered are "no it isn't" arguments sans support and claiming that a couple of individuals agreeing with you is a worldwide trend. |
See, this is what I don't understand. The claiming once again that episode numbers weren't used until TPM (because you assert that they ARE in use now. Was it magic that transformed it? Your assertion that because it was explicitly refered to as Ep 1 and thus people rebranded the first movie as Ep 4 and the others likewise is silly. Why would people rebrand movies because one of the series was called something different?
As for Lucas' renaming, I've already shown that he made the copyright change months before the release of the Special Edition of the first movie and, yet, that didn't have a name change. If Lucas was engaging in a vigerous campaign, why not change the name then? They were only changed with the 2004 DVD collection, where the first movie was titled "Episode 4: A New Hope". But you say beforehand, with the prequals the change came... but since the movies were not rebranded at the time, how could that happen?
As for merchandising and the like. Merchandising with Yoda was accompanied with the name Star Wars, but we know that he was not in the first movie at all.
quote:
2+2=5 and all that. |
It was funny how you never appeared in a thread where a majority of posters agreed that "2+2=5" could exist depending on the defining of the mathematical system only a few months later... even though I bumped it on your behalf.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
24-05-2005 05:12
.
|